It is indisputable that the Republican Party is really the party of civil rights, not the Democrats. And today we have one more example of that truism with the 145th anniversary of the Republican Party’s essential outlawing of the Ku Klux Klan, the Democrat Party’s domestic terror group.

The actions against the Klan stemmed from an outrageous massacre of nearly 300 blacks perpetrated by white, Democrat Klan members in Louisiana in 1868.

On September 28, 1868 — three years after the Confederate south lost the civil war — a mob of marauding whites rampaged through Opelousas, Louisiana and massacred nearly 300 blacks who were Republican voters.

The outrage began when white, Democrat KKK members attacked the white owner of a Republican-leaning newspaper. The newspaper editor, a former school teacher for black students, was defended by several black friends during the attack and this action enraged the mob further sending them on a day-long spree of murder and mayhem.

The attack was so outrageous that the Republican Party acted to essentially ban the KKK. By April 20, 1871, the GOP passed a law banning the oppression perpetrated by the KKK when President Ulysses Grant and Congress passed the Ku Klux Klan Act, also known as the third Enforcement Act. The law established penalties against anyone who tried to deprive any other citizen the benefit of equal protection under the laws of the United States. The law also gave the president the power to use the military to ensure that the rights of blacks were upheld.

This interest in civil rights carried all the way to the 1964 Civil Rights bill that was passed with the overwhelming support of Republicans.Read more

On August 24 of 1855, Abe Lincoln made another one of his arguments against slavery. But I’d dare say that the logic of his point works to defeat the left’s efforts to destroy freedom of religion today, too.

By 1855 Illinoisan Abraham Lincoln had firmly joined the anti-slave element of the Whig Party and he was already developing a reputation as an eloquent speaker against the “Peculiar Institution.”

In August he made the argument that having slavery in a nation that is supposed to believe in the freedom and equality of men is a contradiction that makes the belief in equality essentially a lie.

Here is how he once described the dichotomy between a nation that claims to value equality and a nation that supports slavery:Read more

One hundred and fifty years ago this month, the 13th Amendment officially was ratified, and with it, slavery finally was abolished in America. The New York World hailed it as “one of the most important reforms ever accomplished by voluntary human agency.”

The newspaper said the amendment “takes out of politics, and consigns to history, an institution incongruous to our political system, inconsistent with justice and repugnant to the humane sentiments fostered by Christian civilization.”

With the passage of the 13th Amendment—which states that “[n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction”—the central contradiction at the heart of the Founding was resolved.

Eighty-nine years after the Declaration of Independence had proclaimed all men to be free and equal, race-based chattel slavery would be no more in the United States.

While all today recognize this momentous accomplishment, many remain confused about the status of slavery under the original Constitution. Textbooks and history books routinely dismiss the Constitution as racist and pro-slavery. The New York Times, among others, continues to casually assert that the Constitution affirmed African-Americans to be worth only three-fifths of a human being.

Democrat candidate for President and self proclaimed socialist Senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders visited a Christian university on Monday and told students that our founders were racists and that the USA is inherently a racist nation.

It is a bit unusual that a Democrat would even accept the invitation to speak to a Christian university, of course, but with his claims that the USA is hopelessly racist, Sanders didn’t disappoint from offering the typical anti-American rhetoric that other Democrats indulge.

On Monday Sanders accepted the invitation to speak to a large audience at Liberty University, the college founded in Virginia by Moral Majority leader Jerry Falwell, and during the questions and answer segment of the program, the Vermont Senator insisted that it was a “fact” that America was founded by racists and upon racist principles.

Sanders was asked by the moderator what he’d do about the deteriorating race relations in our country if he became president. His reply was typically liberal in its contempt for our founding.Read more

I thought liberals were always congratulating themselves on how they are so mentally superior that they see “nuances” everywhere? Now a halfwit liberal is making the lie to that by equating U.S. slavery to ISIS rape culture thereby proving he is an utter simpleton.

A pinheaded Harvard professor is now out there insisting that we shouldn’t get too upset over the fact that ISIS terrorists are using rape and sexual slavery as a weapon of war because, gosh darn it, the U.S.A. had slavery 150 years ago, too. You heard that right, that is exactly what Bloomberg columnist and Harvard professor Noah Feldman is saying. He is saying that U.S. slavery is exactly the same as ISIS using rape as a tool.

It’s been 150 years since U.S. law allowed masters to rape enslaved girls and women. Almost all modern Muslim societies banned slavery in the last century. So why is Islamic State turning back the clock, actively embracing and promoting enslavement of Yazidi women, thereby enabling them to be raped under one interpretation of classical Islamic law?

The first half of that is essentially a lie. U.S. law did not excuse rape of slave women in direct terms in the same way that ISIS is using rape as a tool of war and religious supremacy.

Yes, it was true that negro slave women had no standing in American law during that time period, sure, but it is not true that rape was actually ensconced in that law in certain terms. On the other hand, ISIS is making rape and sexual slavery a directly espoused practice that they are trying to back up via sharia law and interpretations of the Koran. So, the case of early 1800s American law turning a blind eye to the ravaging of slave women and ISIS directly entering sexual slavery into its political and legal codes are not at all the same thing.

There is that “nuance” of which the left claims to have sole ownership. If this nitwit “professor” can’t see the truth I just stated, the “nuance” between then and now, then he truly is a simpleton.Read more

When people today say that “the south” were all racist “Confederates” during the civil war you can dismiss them as either historically illiterate cranks, or liars. That’s because there was no such thing as “the south” during the civil war. History is more complicated than that and we risk not understanding our own country if we ignore this fact.

When simpletons think about the American civil war they think of “the north” versus “the south.” But the truth is there was never any “the south” during the whole of the conflagration. Not for an instant was “the south” fully vested in the Confederate States of America. Instead, as “the south” fought the federal army in multiple places around the country there were vicious internal insurrections and mini civil wars going on all over the place as southerners who supported the U.S. government fought and killed southerners who supported the nascent Confederacy and this fighting was going on in the supposed Confederate states themselves, quite apart from the war proper raging on famed battlefields across the land.

The fact is, “the south” was never fully under the control of the central Confederate government in Richmond (and Montgomery, Alabama before that) and neither were the Confederate state governments able to completely control their own states because of constant internal resistance from their own citizens. There was internecine warfare going on in North Carolina, Missouri, Tennessee, Texas and other southern states throughout the civil war.

Even as the south was never fully vested in the Confederacy, the north was never paralyzed with such consternation. A key to proving this is to look at the volunteers who streamed to the armies north and south. In the north there is only one state, Illinois, that ever had any appreciable southern volunteers.Read more

The current flap over the Confederate flag has two very interesting features. One is that the debate over the flag is completely divorced from the incident that supposedly spawned it–the nine murdered in a Charleston church. And two, it is notable for the fact that the media is lying about the flag’s history by making the Confederacy out to be a “Republican problem” instead of more properly a Democrat one.

While Democrats and their media lapdogs run around attacking the Confederate flag in support of the nine murder victims of the AME church in Charleston, the fact is the flag has nothing at all to do with the attack. Many have noted that the whole debate is a total distraction, certainly, but it is a distraction with a point and that point is in my second reason for this debate. Clearly the goal is to drum up a fake issue with which to attack Republicans.

One of the more fitting example of this effort to paint Republicans as the Party of the Confederacy is in a Monday piece by The New York Times’s Michael Barabaro and co-author Jonathan Martin.

This week the left has gone off on another one of its meaningless tangents in response to something wholly divorced from their newest crusade. This time they are suddenly all upset about the Confederate flag. Why? Because a killer is seen in a photo with one. So, OK, fine. The left has its wild eyed tangents, we all know. But what is most infuriating about this particular crusade is that morons who claim to be Republicans are also joining in with this silliness. Certainly those who have should be branded traitors to the center right coalition.

Now, let’s get a few historical things straight before we get any further into this slapping down of these useful idiots on the right for being so stupid as to allow the left to–once again–control the entire political narrative. The Confederate flag is no longer an effective symbol of racism. The CS flag is not any more a racist symbol than the US or the British flags.

Of course, while it is true that the CS flag is essentially an anti-US government flag, it isn’t an anti-American flag. It is true that it is a flag that opposed the government of the United States but it never was one that opposed the American ideal. It isn’t an anti-American flag because as far as the Confederates were concerned in 1860 they were being more true to the original intent of the American founders than the US government was. In fact, their CS Constitution is in most ways just a copy of the US Constitution.

With their claim to be giving more deference to the founder’s ideals, the civil war’s “rebels” shared a sentiment with the American patriots from the Revolutionary War. Our founders wanted to separate from Britain because they felt that Britain was no longer acting British and had instead become something inimical to Britishness. The founders felt they were being truer to Britishness than were the British back in the mother country. In like style the Confederates felt they were being more American than the federal government and the Yankees.

But it is also absolutely beyond doubt that the CS government’s flags (the Bonnie Blue flag, the proper Stars and Bars–which isn’t the Southern Cross–the Stainless Banner and the Third National flags) were all essentially racist banners because one of the central tenets upon which the CS government was built was the protection of slavery.

There were several other reasons for the war, mind you, but slavery was foremost. You can make that out as a fact because nearly every secession statement by the southern states issued to explain why they were leaving the union mentions slavery multiple times.Read more

PBS is not fair or balanced and nothing it does can be trusted. We see this claim fully validated with how the network bent over for actor Ben Affleck’s demand that his slave-owning ancestry be eliminated from a recent program tracing the actor’s family.

PBS had Affleck on its show “Finding Your Roots” to trace his family history and learn of his lineage. But during the process, PBS discovered that the actor had slave owners in his family tree. Affleck was not having any of that, though, and demanded that the show edit out any of that reality. Affleck didn’t want his slave history known by the public.

Instead of retaining its integrity, PBS kowtowed to Affleck’s demands and agreed to excise all mentions from the show of the truth of his family tree.

We know all this because of an email hacker, not because PBS reported the truth to the country that pays its bills with tax dollars.Read more

There is a new campaign afoot that is tickling the interests of the mainstream media. It is an effort to kick President Andrew Jackson off the $20 bill and replace him with a woman. Sadly at least three of the candidates do not belong on the list. One is a famous hater of men, another can only be termed a mass murderer, and the third was an important supporter of the genocide of African Americans. How is it these three women deserve to be celebrated on the $20 bill is anyone’s guess.

The campaign called Women On The 20, is, the group says on its website, is an effort to “compel historic change by convincing President Obama that NOW is the time to put a woman’s face on our paper currency.”

The group hopes to have the change on the money made by the year 2020, which happens to be the 100th anniversary of the 19th Amendment, the one that gave women the right to vote.Read more

Conversations about reparations are not about money but about people and about the way that people are seen and valued in our society. These are difficult conversations, and we have found that what is most challenging about the idea of reparations today is the notion that America still owes a debt to black people.

WTH: First of all, the very first sentence is a lie. It is about money. It’s about an assumed entitlement that these pseudo academics in “African American studies” have been pushing for decades in an attempt to legitimize their field of “study.” When you have nothing to study, you have to invent it, after all.

But secondly, no the USA does not owe blacks anything at all. The USA paid for slavery with over the blood of over 600,000 men and women from 1860 to 1865. That is a debt paid in full. The rest has just been working out the details.Read more

The faux President of the United States on the ABC TV show Scandal gave one of those typically left-wing TV speeches that is more like an uninformed screed meant to push a leftist agenda than truthful commentary. In this case the actor pretending to be president scorned the Second Amendment and then said incorrectly that slavery was enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

On the TV show, “President” Fitzgerald Grant (Tony Goldwyn) noted that the Second Amendment was “set in stone” in the Constitution, then as an aside said, “So was slavery, by the way.”

No it wasn’t… by the way. It is a lie the left tells.

In the show the “president’s” son was killed in a mass school shooting sending this “President” into his screed.

To illustrate an article about racism in the Republican Party, Politico dipped into American history and oddly dug up a photo of Democrat segregationist George Wallace.

Claiming that “the seeds of America’s dysfunction were planted 50 years ago,” and going on to say that “the ugly politics of race had everything to do with it,” Doug McAdam and Karen Kloos indulged the decades old liberal claim that the political parties have somehow switched places from 50 years ago. Now the GOP is the racist party and the Democrats are the accepting ones, the authors contend.

Despite that George Wallace was an unreconstructed Democrat segregationist and so were his followers, Politico tars the GOP with the racists and Dixiecrats of the 1960s.Read more

Looks like the Obamaites are once again attempting to tech our children that the U.S. is an evil country with new nationalized “history” standards for our schools that eliminate the founding fathers and focuses only on a relentlessly negative interpretation of the birth of the country.

I am late to this story, I know (it is impossible to cover everything, certainly), but this one is egregious, so I just had to hit it. Still, it is of a piece with the way the left is attempting to destroy this country by tearing it down in the eyes of our youth so that they grow up with the left’s preconceived notion that this country is evil.

Late last moth documents were uncovered that reveals they way that College Board authors have redesigned the AP U.S. History (APUSH) Framework from a previous five-page, cursory outline that leaves a lot of what is to be taught to teachers and school districts to a massive 98-page document describing in minute detail what is to be taught and more importantly what isn’t to be taught.

The College Board, the administers of advanced placement (AP) courses and tests, is unveiling the new scheme for AP U.S. history which is to be given to 450,000 students who take these history classes across the nation.Read more

If you favor the Tea Party way or you are a gun owner, Jesse Jackson wants you to know you are a racist, terrorist just like members of the old Confederacy.

That’s right, Jackson thinks if you believe in the U.S. Constitution, you are a terrorist looking to over throw the government and kill black people and you want to bring back slavery and the old Confederacy.

He’s made these idiotic, hyperbolic statements many times, of course–like in the video above from Feb. of this year–But his latest statement was made in remarks to Politico on the eve of the anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech.Read more

Earlier this month the President of Emory University wrote a piece for the school magazine about the efficacy of compromise. By the 24th he was forced to apologize for the piece because he mentioned slavery fully in context in his piece. The faux outrage that his comments caused proved three things: that no one at Emory has any grasp of American history, that the professors at Emory University are morons, and that the student body are utterly unable to employ critical thinking.

The segment that upset everyone was utterly innocuous and cited properly in context by Wagner, without hate or racism. Unfortunately, logic and context isn’t what the race baiters of Emory University are interested in, sad to say.

President James Wagner’s piece was meant to extol the virtues of compromise and meant his piece to explain that this vaunted compromise was as American as Apple Pie, baseball, and the restl. Pursuant to that, Wagner wrote the following:

One instance of constitutional compromise was the agreement to count three-fifths of the slave population for purposes of state representation in Congress. Southern delegates wanted to count the whole slave population, which would have given the South greater influence over national policy. Northern delegates argued that slaves should not be counted at all, because they had no vote. As the price for achieving the ultimate aim of the Constitution—“to form a more perfect union”—the two sides compromised on this immediate issue of how to count slaves in the new nation. Pragmatic half-victories kept in view the higher aspiration of drawing the country more closely together.

Such as it is, this is correct, straight forward, pure fact. It has not a whiff of controversy to it. Well, it wouldn’t have a whiff of controversy if an intelligent, informed person were reading that excerpt, anyway.

Instead of intelligent people, however, we ended up with dolts like Emory history “professor” Leslie Harris, halfwits like “professor” Leroy Davis, and racebaiters like student Jovanna Jones.Read more

Actor and hardcore progressive Danny Glover should add revisionist historian to his growing resume of left-wing activism after a recent visit to Texas A&M University where he told students that the Second Amendment was mainly meant to keep African Americans in slavery and to kill Native American peoples.

During his January 17 appearance at the university, Glover thought to teach the students attending about the real purpose of the Second Amendment.

I don’t know if people know the genesis of the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment comes from the right to protect, for settlers to protect themselves from slave revolts and from uprisings by Native Americans. So, a revolt from people who were stolen from their lands or revolts from people whose land was stolen from. That was the genesis of the Second Amendment.

This is simple historical revisionism. Slave revolts had yet to become the constant, nagging fear it was later to become for southern slaveholders. There was no such preoccupation in the late 1780s during the debate over the Constitution or in the decades previous to that and it certainly wasn’t a cause for northerners to worry.

Like most conservatives, I felt Election Day was the end of the United States of America. I am not convinced going forward that it isn’t, either. But on this day of giving thanks for what we do have, it would be a mistake not to be grateful for the things with which we have, in our good fortune, been blessed. There are things that we should and must be thankful for.

What are those things? What should we be thankful for? Well, certainly there are all manner of things we should be thankful for as individuals. Our loved ones, friends, perhaps our health and good fortunes. But, as a nation, there are many things to be thankful for, even if those things seem fleeting. Granted, there are many things other than what I list below that we should be thankful for. I have no intention of claiming this list is comprehensive.

So, first and foremost, as a nation we should be thankful for our founders’ vision of a nation created on the premise of self-government, freedom and liberty.Read more

In yet another facile example of the Old Media equating President Obama’s presidency to the greatness of Abraham Lincoln’s, NBC News correspondent Kevin Tibbles used the occasion of the opening of the new Lincoln movie helmed by Director Steven Spielberg to do just that.

On Saturday’s NBC Nightly News, Tibbles reported on the opening of a movie that has widespread Oscar buzz, Spielberg’s Lincoln a project that was more than a decade in the making.

Tibbles goes to the director himself who gives us a line about why he wanted to do a movie about Abe Lincoln, our 16th President.

“Lincoln advocated things that we hold dear today. He advocated that government can be a positive force for the good of all people,” Spielberg said.

Then Kevin Tibbles kicks into high gear his facile equating of Lincoln and Obama.Read more

On the Sunday, October 28 edition of ABC’s This Week, Andrew Sullivan of The Daily Beast claimed that Obama might lose this election because the whole south is filled with racists that are somehow just like the Old Confederacy. As George Will noted, according to Sullivan all the whites that were not racist in 2008 suddenly are racist in 2012.

In a discussion of the “racial gap” in this year’s election, Sullivan declared all southerners to be racists and are sliding back into the civil war. “If Virginia and Florida go back to the Republicans, it’s the Confederacy, entirely. You put the map of the civil war over this electoral map you got the civil war,” he said.

George Will correctly dismissed Sullivan’s ranting as poppycock. Will noted that Democrats have been steadily losing the white vote since 1964 and that it has nothing to do with Barack Obama being black.Read more

As he unveiled his epic new movie based on Abraham Lincoln’s civil war era presidency, Steven Spielberg said he doesn’t want his film to become a “political football” in today’s presidential election. But as he talked about it further, it seemed as if he went on to say that today’s Republican party is somehow just like the slave-holding Democrats of the antebellum south.

That’s right, Spielberg implied that today’s Republicans are just like the old south’s racist Confederates.

These comments were delivered during a Q & A at the New York Film Festival on Monday, October 8, after he debuted his new film starring Daniel Day Lewis as Lincoln, Sally Field as Mary Todd Lincoln, and Tommy Lee Jones as Pennsylvania Congressman Thaddeus Stevens, a zealous anti-slavery activist.

Mike Fleming reports that Spielberg delayed the release of his film until just after the election in order to keep his work out of the current presidential election.

“I just said, please don’t release this until the election is over. I didn’t want it to be this political football going back and forth,” Fleming reports Spielberg as saying.

Of course, it is admirable that director Spielberg wants to make sure that a film based on history is not abused as a “political football” in today’s political contest. Unfortunately, Spielberg, a big Obama supporter, went on himself to use history to make modern political points.

After pronouncing his disdain for abusing history for political points, he did just that, saying:Read more

Before we get any further into this story, I have to warn you that this is not satire. That having been said, Buzzfeed’s Zeke Miller perpetrated one of the worst attempts at guilt by association ever made. Miller attempted to intimate that Mitt Romney is a racist because his motorcade drove past private property that had a Confederate flag flying on it as he campaigned in Virginia.

You read that right. All Romney did was sit in a car that drove past a Confederate flag and that was something that Miller thought was “news.”

Miller made this trenchant observation on his Twitter feed on October 5.

Romney motorcade just passed a hill flying a large confederate flag in rural SW VA

Wow. Imagine, driving past a Confederate flag in a state that makes millions in tourist money off its intimate connection to American history! Imagine the sheer luck of finding a Confederate flag flying in the one state most associated with the Civil War! Why, the absolute craziness of finding a Confederate flag flying in the state that hosted the Capitol of the Confederate States of America!

After forty some years of prominently featuring the Southern Cross flag of the old Confederacy as part of its schtick, suddenly the southern rock band Lynyrd Skynrd is denouncing the banner claiming it is a symbol of racism.

Sole surviving original band member, Gary Rossington, explained why the band was dumping its long-time use of the Southern Cross flag (often mistakenly called “The Stars and Bars”) in an interview with CNN’s Fredricka Whitfield in an episode of the cabler’s Face to Face entertainment segment.

It became such a issue, you know, about race and stuff, where, we just had it, in the beginning because we were southern and that was our image back in the 70s and late 60s because they kinda branded us from being from the south so we showed that.

But I think through the years, you know, people like the KKK and skinheads and people have kind of kidnapped the Dixie or Rebel flag from the southern tradition and the heritage of the soldiers, you know, that’s what it was about. And they kinda made it look bad in certain ways. So, we didn’t want that to go to our fans or show the image like we agreed with any of the race stuff or any of the bad things.

Bandmate Johnny Van Zant went on noting that they all grew up “loving the old Blues artists,” and other black musicians and they “just didn’t want to be associated with that particular (racist) thing.”Read more

CNN took the time just ahead of the Democrat National Convention to put together a little primer on the history of the party and, while they do mention slavery as a prime issue in the party’s early days, no mention is made of its support of Jim Crow, Japanese Internment, or the Ku Klux Klan.

The CNN Explains video only lasts a few minutes, so it is impossible to do a comprehensive history of anything in such a short time, certainly. Even so, the video had a few serious omissions and at least one misleading factoid.

The video begins properly relating the fact that the first President to call himself a Democrat, Andrew Jackson, was a “fierce” supporter of slavery and worked tirelessly to keep the government in Washington out of the people’s business in order to assure the rights of slave owners.

While it was quite right for CNN to note that the Democrat Party began as one chiefly interested in protecting slavery, the video somehow forgets to mention that the Democrats were also responsible for starting the Civil War — the first shots were fired by Confederate forces, after all. Additionally, the video forgets to mention that even after the civil war the Democrat Party sponsored such racist attacks on fellow citizens as Jim Crow, poll taxes to suppress minority voting rights, Japanese internment during WWII, not to mention creation and support of the Ku Klux Klan.Read more

Proving that nothing so painfully obvious as Joe Biden saying that Republicans want to bring back chattel slavery can’t be spun away into meaningless babble, MSNBC trotted out Joy-Ann Reid on the August 15 broadcast of News Nation with Tameron Hall to prove it could be done.

On Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden perpetrated yet another one of his near daily gaffes at a rally in Danville, Virginia. His comments drew sharp criticism from Romney, Republicans — any clear thinking person should be aghast at Biden’s remarks , really — and this prompted MSNBC to cast about to find some way to obviate Biden’s clear context into something that would reflect badly against Republicans instead of Biden and Obama.

In Virginia Biden said, “Look at what they value, and look at their budget. And look what they’re proposing. [Romney] said in the first 100 days, he’s going to let the big banks write their own rules — unchain Wall Street.”

Biden next lapsed into street talk, or what some might call black dialect, dramatically saying, “They’re going to put y’all back in chains.”

The Atlantic’s Yoni Appelbaum has a troubled little mind. He seems to be an excitable sort, too. I say this because during this 150th anniversary of the American Civil War he strangely sees evil Confederate, German, Nazi, racists at Civil War events. He might want to see a therapist about this. Either that or he’s just another left-wing writer that is striving so hard to find something, anything, to write about that he’s put aside common sense and instead decided to illicitly impute any manner of absurd motivations to Germany’s Civil War reenactors. You know, because he wants to be considered the thoughtful type, because this sort of tripe is what passes for intellectualism in journalism.

Appelbaum’s article on Germans that reenact the American Civil War is entirely absurd, of course. He imputes all sorts of motives, dark and evil, to a mere hobby. He sees shadows of low and dangerous undercurrents to this pastime and desperately tries to tie a plethora of evils into the harmless fun of dressing up as a soldier from some 150 years ago.

Appelbaum finds that many Germans reenact the American Civil War in Germany as Confederate soldiers and this troubles him. He notes that Germans that reenact the American Civil War as Confederates are play-acting contrary to their own pre-WWII cultural history because few Germans fought for the South in the conflict. In this he is correct. But after getting one thing right, Appelbaum launches off into paroxysms of agonized fantasy. One gets the feeling he is not writing to explore truths but is writing to get the knowing and concerned nods of other wacky leftists like himself.Read more

Richard Cohen is what passes for an opinion editorialist in the Washington Post — not a learned one, just a bloviating one. Cohen’s latest, “The Myth of American Exceptionalism,” is at the same time as self-loathing as it is historically stupid. Not only does this nonsense Cohen ladled out upon us all serve an example that you don’t have to actually know anything to be in our modern Old Media establishment, but it is evidence that the profession of editor is long dead.

In his ten paragraphs Cohen indulges every left-wing trope that one can find. Whites are all racist, we don’t do enough for “the poor” in America, Christianity is the root of all evil, and it all started in the 1850s when the Republican Party was born. Most ridiculously, Cohen a-historically seems to think that the art of compromise died in American politics when the GOP was born. This last bit alone is guffaw worthy to say the least.Read more

No president’s views of race relations have elicited more spirited conversation than Abe Lincoln’s and his complex views are again the subject of conjecture. A new book about Lincoln’s ideas on sending America’s negro population to another country, a policy called “colonization,” has been penned by a researcher at George Mason University showing that Lincoln pursued the policy long after other researchers said he had dropped the idea.

The argument has raged for decades over just what our 16th president thought about black people. Did he hate them or love them, did he respect them or dismiss them, did he think they were equals to whites or inferior? Did he care if they were enslaved or was he an ardent abolitionist? The argument has raged and with this book rages on still…

In this war, no one wins. The country will be decimated, mistrust among the citizens will abound, and black/white racism will be rampant in the populace. What could possibly start a war among fellow citizens who share everything except the same skin color?

The war is coming. The clash between the majority of Blacks, and the majority of Whites seems imminent.

Several racial incidents may be harbingers. 1) Non-prosecution of the new Black Panthers in federal Voting Rights Act violations against white victims [No Whites Need Apply], 2) the US Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights(OCR) received almost 7,000 complaints (11% increase) over the past year [How’s That Post-Racial America Working Out for You?], 3) gerrymandering, and 4) purposeful indoctrination that lynching in America is still going on.Read more

Admin

-By Warner Todd Huston
It is indisputable that the Republican Party is really the party of civil rights, not the Democrats. And today we have one more example of that truism with the 145th anniversary of the